Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 129 (CAL)

Arnab Kumar Dey v. Ulex Computer

2020-02-04

JAY SENGUPTA

body2020
JUDGMENT Jay Sengupta, J. - This is an application challenging issuance of warrant of arrest against the petitioners in a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits as follows. Due to serious illness of the mother of the petitioner no.1, present petitioners had been absent off and on in the proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act where they have been arraigned as accused. Earlier, warrants of arrest had been issued. Thereafter, the petitioners appeared and joined the proceeding. At present, the petitioners praying for setting aside of the warrant of arrest with an undertaking that they would appear before the learned trial court on all the subsequent dates that may be fixed by the learned trial court. 3. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel representing the petitioners and have perused the revision petition. 4. No prejudice will be caused to anyone if a direction is passed allowing the petitioners to join the proceeding so that the proceeding can come to a logical conclusion. 5. The conduct of the present petitioners are surely not above board. The ailment of the mother of the petitioner no.1 can not be the reason for the absence of the accused before the learned trial court on so many dates. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioners are required to join the proceeding at the earliest. 6. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I stay the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioners for a period of four weeks from this date and direct the petitioners to appear before the learned trial court within such time and in the event the petitioners appear before the learned trial court and file an application for bail within such time, the application for bail shall be considered in accordance with law. 7. The learned trial court is requested to conclude the impugned proceeding as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, preferably within a period of three months from the next date of hearing. In the event, the petitioners fails to appear before the learned trial court within the stipulated time, warrant shall be reissued and it shall be open to the learned trial court to invoke any coercive measure to ensure the attendance of the accused. 8. In the event, the petitioners fails to appear before the learned trial court within the stipulated time, warrant shall be reissued and it shall be open to the learned trial court to invoke any coercive measure to ensure the attendance of the accused. 8. With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of. 9. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.